Justin

This soldier is currently in Japanese custody, not American.

Glad to see that the US military seems to be cooperating with the investigation, at least.

The US military’s refusals in the past to hand over one of their own hurts their credibility and their soft power. No one is above the law, not even the military.

Oh you sweet summer child

The cold war is over. Coups don’t work like that any more. https://youtu.be/gYvht5nu7rU?t=348

Coops are still about the money. They’re about saving money by sharing resources with fellow workers/consumers, and maintaining democratic control over the company. You’re not going to get rich from a coop (without embezzlement), but you and your coowners will be cutting out the middle man. Obviously, it only makes sense for industries that you’re heavily invested in.

Self hosting can save a lot of money compared to Google or aws. Also, self hosting doesn’t make you vulnerable to DDOS, you can be DDOSed even without a home server.

You don’t need VLANs to keep your network secure, but you should make sure than any self hosted service isn’t unnecessarily opens up tot he internet, and make sure that all your services are up to date.

What services are you planning to run? I could help suggest a threat model and security policy.

Reminds me of what happened when Milosevic tried to decline a ceasefire agreement

humidity shouldnt be a problem with modern ventilation and such large cooling surfaces.

I’m honestly shocked how much of a fuss the participants are making over 22-26° rooms. My apartment is almost never below 25°, even in the winter. Are they somehow going to perform better if it’s 20° and they freeze? Not to mention fucking loud portable air conditioners are. There’s a heatwave going through Sweden right now, and my apartment was up to 30° this afternoon.

Also really defeats the point about not using air-conditioning when all the participants just bring in super-inefficient portable units and then immediately throw them in the trash. I guess it’s good for energy efficiency in the long run though for when these buildings become normal apartments.

I’m using IPv6 on Kubernetes and it’s amazing. Every Pod has its own global IP address. There is no NAT and no giant ARP routing table slowing down the other computers on my network. Each of my nodes announces a /112 for itself to my router, allowing it to give addresses to over 65k pods. There is no feasible limit to the amount of IP addresses I could assign to my containers and load balancers, and no routing overhead. I have no need for port forwarding on my router or worrying about dynamic IPs, since I just have a /80 block with no firewall that I assign to my public facing load balancers.

Of course, I only have around 300 pods on my cluster, and realistically, it’s not really possible for there to be over 1 million containers in current kubernetes clusters, due to other limitations. But it is still a huge upgrade in reducing overhead and complexity, and increasing scale.

I haven’t really looked into it, but it doesn’t seem like it.

Heres the documentation about having multiple cidr pools in one cluster with the Cilium network driver, and it seems to imply that each Pod only gets one IP.

https://docs.cilium.io/en/stable/network/concepts/ipam/multi-pool/

There’s something called Multus that I haven’t looked into, but even then it looks like that is for multiple interfaces per Pod, not multiple IPS per interface.

https://github.com/k8snetworkplumbingwg/multus-cni

Containers are just network namespaces on Linux, and all the routing is done in iptables or ebpf, so it’s theoretically possible to have multiple IP addresses, but doesn’t look like anybody has started implementing it. There’s actually a lot of Kubernetes clusters that just use stateful IPv6 NAT for the internal Pod network, unfortunately.

Yeah, I wonder if there’s any proposals to allow for multiple IPV6 addresses in Kubernetes, it would be a much better solution than NAT.

As far as I know, it’s currently not possible. Every container/Pod receives a single IPv4 and/or IPv6 address on creation from the networking driver.

I have static IPs for my Kubernetes nodes, and I actually use DHCPv6 for dynamic dns so I can reach any device with a hostname, even though most of my devices don’t have static IPs.

The issue is those static IPs are tied to my current ISP, preventing me from changing ISPs without deleting my entire Kubernetes cluster.

Hurricane Electric gives me a /48.

Site-local ipv6 would work here as well, true. But then my containers wouldnt have internet access. Kubernetes containers use Ipam with a single subnet, they can’t use SLAAC.

1:1 stateless NAT is useful for static IPs. Since all your addresses are otherwise global, if you need to switch providers or give up your /64, then you’ll need to re-address your static addresses. Instead, you can give your machines static private IPs, and just translate the prefix when going through NAT. It’s a lot less horrible than IPv4 NAT since there’s no connection tracking needed.

This is something I probably should have done setting up my home Kubernetes cluster. My current IPv6 prefix is from Hurricane Electric, and if my ISP ever gives me a real IPv6 prefix, I will have to delete the entire cluster and recreate it with the new prefix.

Onani!

yeah, Id recommend switching on your secondary machine, so you can try it out and use it properly, but not get frustrated if it does something you don’t expect.

The US was aware of the Israeli attack plans, according to CNN. If the US is shooting down Iranian missiles, why don’t they shoot down Israeli missiles as well? Nothing good will happen from any sort of missile exchange in that region.

It’s an algorithm for determining how fast to upload packets. This article just talks about how to enable it.

Here’s the Wikipedia section about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP_congestion_control#TCP_BBR

The gist is that instead of only throttling upload rate based on packet loss, BBR constantly measures roundtrip delay (ping) to determine how much bandwidth is available.

We still have frequent lan parties at our university

It’s impossible to control the supply side, aside from stabilizing the countries that refugees are coming from.

Any measure to try to handle refugees outside of the EU inevitably ends with the EU paying corrupt dictators to go and shove refugees in tents and torture/kill them, see Turkey, Egypt, Mexico, etc. It also opens up the door for dictators like Putin and Erdogan to hold these refugees over the EU’s head, and use them as a weapon to flood Europe with refugees if the EU ever tries to hold these dictators responsible. Any attempt to pay Turkey/Egypt/etc to handle refugees is a wasteful PR stunt at best, and a footgun that causes human suffering at worst.

A sustainably-financed way to handle refugees inside the EU, and also having a quick way to catch those gaming the system, is the only way to reach a sustainable solution.

I don’t know too much about this bill, and I’m sensitive to the human rights arguments that the left has made. But,considering how this bill is simultaneously criticized by the far right, while also smartly reducing the burden of asylum intake, I get the feeling that this bill finally struck the right compromise to get this damn immigration debate out of European politics.